1. Jemma Canavan complained to the Independent Press
Standards Organisation that Wishaw Press breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) and
Clause 2 (Privacy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined
“Get us out of here after gun and knives terror” published on 15 March 2017.
The article was also published on dailyrecord.co.uk, headlined “Young couple
living like prisoners in own home after guns and knives terror in
Gowkthrapple.”

2. The article reported that the complainant and her husband
had asked their housing co-operative to rehouse them due to anti-social
behaviour. The article reported that the couple had been threatened with guns
and knives and had been attacked with bottles and eggs while walking in Wishaw
Main Street. The article detailed the complainant’s concern that the housing
co-operative had not taken their concerns seriously and had not rehoused the
couple as requested. The article included a photograph of the complainant and
her husband, which also appeared on the front page of the newspaper.

3. The online article reported that the couple had “spotted
neighbours who are threatening them armed with guns and knives” and went on to
clarify that they had been “threatened at their home by people who they have
seen with knives [and] guns.”

4. The complainant said that the article was misleading. She
had told the newspaper that she had seen the neighbours that were threatening
the couple with guns and knives, but had not said that they had been directly
threatened with weapons, as reported in the article. The complainant also said
it was inaccurate to state that they were being threatened by four separate
families, and had been attacked in Wishaw Main Street. The complainant said
that she had contacted the newspaper regarding her landlord’s failure to comply
with their rules and regulations in regards to anti-social behaviour and had
not wanted the article to focus on the dispute with her neighbours.

5. The complainant also said that while she and her husband
had consented to their photograph being taken and published, its placement on
the front page, as well as reporting the area in which they lived, was an
intrusion into their private life and had put their safety at risk.

6. The newspaper did not accept that it had breached the
Code. It said that the complainant had discussed the instances of anti-social
behaviour with the journalist at length and said it was necessary to include
these details to explain why the complainant believed her landlord’s inaction
was unsatisfactory. The newspaper provided copies of the reporter’s notes from
phone calls he had had with the complainant and her husband. It said that the
complainant had told the reporter that she knew that her neighbours had guns
and knives as she had seen them, and this had led the reporter to believe that
the couple were being threatened by these weapons.

7. The newspaper also
said that the couple had consented to the newspaper’s photographer coming to
their home and had posed for photographs. They said that it was agreed that the
article would refer to the area in which they lived, and did not believe that
the publication of this detail represented private information about the
complainant.

Relevant Code Provisions

7. Clause 1 (Accuracy)

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate,
misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not
supported by the text.

ii) A significant accuracy, misleading statement or
distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and-where
appropriate- an apology published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence
should be as required by the regulator.

Clause 2 (Privacy) *

i) Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private
and family life, home, health, and correspondence, including digital
communications.

ii) Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any
individual’s private life without consent. Account will be taken of the
complainant’s own public disclosures of information.

iii) It is unacceptable to photograph individuals, without
their consent, in public or private places where there is a reasonable
expectation of privacy.

Mediated outcome

8. The complaint was not resolved through direct
correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into
the matter.

9. Following IPSO’s involvement, the newspaper offered, as a
gesture of goodwill, to remove the article from its website and social media
pages.

10. The complainant said that this would resolve the matter
to her satisfaction.

11. As the complaint was successfully mediated, the
Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been
any breach of the Code.